[661_Pete]

My fault entirely!

Faced with a problematic opening bid this morning, and having a longish think about it, I absentmindedly let my hand stray onto and touch the 'bid' cards (as opposed to PASS etc.) in the box - then drew my hand back. Opponent saw this and said "are you bidding or not?" I then felt honour bound to make a bid rather than pass (which would have been the best option I think).

What should I have done? I'm trying to be fair here. I know I shouldn't have touched the cards before deciding my call anyway.

[blackshoe]

This is a matter of regulation so it depends on who your RA is.

One could argue that your LHO's question is an attempt at intimidation. One could argue that it worked. This is not a good thing.

The fact that you have given your partner UI does not, under the rules of the game, give you any obligation to do anything. OTOH, if touching the bidding cards is considered a bid, then you're obligated to make a bid.

Whatever your call, partner is obligated not to take advantage of any information he gleans from your irregularity.

The right thing to do at the table would have been to call the director, report the opponent's question (including tone if you heard any) and ask what your obligations are.

[steve2005]

This isn't chess where if you touch a piece you have to move it.
What you did causes problems but you don't have to make a call other than pass.

[pran]

 steve2005, on 2018-March-10, 07:04, said:

This isn't chess where if you touch a piece you have to move it.
What you did causes problems but you don't have to make a call other than pass.

I believe there are Regulating Authorities where a call is considered made in the very moment that a bid card is touched.

Not so in Norway, nor (I guess) anywhere within EBU?

[blackshoe]

EBU is "removed from the bidding box with intent". ACBL is "placed on the table". ACBL cautions against touching the bidding cards before you've decided what call to make. I think EBU does too. Haven't looked at other jurisdictions.

[barmar]

I haven't heard of any place like that, either. And it doesn't sound like he actually touched a specific bidding card, his hand just rested on that section of the bidding box.

I'm not sure that there's really much UI from this. The fact that you were taking so long obviously suggests you were considering bidding, so the UI has already been transmitted by your tempo, and touching the bidding box isn't any new UI. It's too late to unring the tempo bell, and partner is already constrained by that.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2018-March-10, 10:42, said:

I haven't heard of any place like that, either. And it doesn't sound like he actually touched a specific bidding card, his hand just rested on that section of the bidding box.

I believe FIGB (Italy) used to have explicit regulations about this, but it no longer does in 2017 as far as I can see. Directors still take a dim view of hovering over or touching the bidding box, particularly if it indicates one section and then a card is drawn from the other.

The FIGB does say that players are free either to extract a single bid or to extract the bid and any lesser unbid cards, so long as the chosen method is consistently followed. It seems curious to allow this potential UI when the second choice is more practical anyway.

[WellSpyder]

 pescetom, on 2018-March-11, 13:13, said:

The FIGB does say that players are free either to extract a single bid or to extract the bid and any lesser unbid cards, so long as the chosen method is consistently followed. It seems curious to allow this potential UI when the second choice is more practical anyway.

Where is the UI if the chosen method is consistently followed?

[pescetom]

 WellSpyder, on 2018-March-12, 06:16, said:

Where is the UI if the chosen method is consistently followed?

There is none, of course.
But equally obviously, nobody is in a position to observe whether the chosen method is consistently followed, except the opponents at one given table - and playing 2 or 3 boards per round that means that a deviant partnership could use this as a signal in 33% to 50% of all boards played without being detected.
I don't think this is happening, indeed everybody seems to follow the second method which is clearly superior.
But that is just another reason why it seems odd to offer this choice and then restrict it.
The laws and regulations are full of other arbitrary impositions of method that people follow without complaining

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2018-March-12, 12:05, said:

There is none, of course.
But equally obviously, nobody is in a position to observe whether the chosen method is consistently followed, except the opponents at one given table - and playing 2 or 3 boards per round that means that a deviant partnership could use this as a signal in 33% to 50% of all boards played without being detected.
I don't think this is happening, indeed everybody seems to follow the second method which is clearly superior.
But that is just another reason why it seems odd to offer this choice and then restrict it.
The laws and regulations are full of other arbitrary impositions of method that people follow without complaining

I've seen a number of players using the single-card method in Philly. In particular, the guy I was playing with Fri-Sun in Philly is one of them. I've never understood why some people like to bid like this -- they claim it's just as easy, but i see them fumbling to extract and replace bidding cards much more than people who use the normal method. And when cards get out of order in the box I suspect there's a 99% chance it's because of one of them.

Why do they allow it? Why shouldn't they? The bidding is just as clear. In fact, it might be clearer -- you don't have to worry about cards in the pile sliding around so it looks like one of the lower cards is a bid.

[Tramticket]

 barmar, on 2018-March-13, 00:23, said:

Why do they allow it? Why shouldn't they?

Because people who bid like this seem incapable (in my experience) of putting their bidding cards back correctly. There is nothing worse than following one of these clowns around the room and having to restore the bidding cards to the correct order at each table.

[blackshoe]

 Tramticket, on 2018-March-13, 02:00, said:

Because people who bid like this seem incapable (in my experience) of putting their bidding cards back correctly. There is nothing worse than following one of these clowns around the room and having to restore the bidding cards to the correct order at each table.

Carry your own bidding box with you. Then the guy following you will blame you when the box on the table is a mess.

[gordontd]

 Tramticket, on 2018-March-13, 02:00, said:

Because people who bid like this seem incapable (in my experience) of putting their bidding cards back correctly. There is nothing worse than following one of these clowns around the room and having to restore the bidding cards to the correct order at each table.

I suspect the main reason players do it is to emulate Zia, but I must say I've never encountered any of them putting the bidding cards back in the wrong place. Which is more than I can say for those who take the whole pile of cards out as required.

[pran]

 gordontd, on 2018-March-13, 08:59, said:

I suspect the main reason players do it is to emulate Zia, but I must say I've never encountered any of them putting the bidding cards back in the wrong place. Which is more than I can say for those who take the whole pile of cards out as required.

OH?
When bidding boxes were new in Norway we needed some training on the players' side, but today even the smallest club uses them with no problem (except when players accidentally drop a pile of bid cards on the floor).

And I have never experienced any player who correctly took the whole relevant pile of cards for his bid from the box not restoring his bid cards correctly to the box after the auction.

[StevenG]

 pran, on 2018-March-13, 10:13, said:

And I have never experienced any player who correctly took the whole relevant pile of cards for his bid from the box not restoring his bid cards correctly to the box after the auction.

Really? Only yesterday I had to cope with a bidding box where not only had the cards been scrambled, they had been returned to the box upside down.

[barmar]

 StevenG, on 2018-March-13, 10:32, said:

Really? Only yesterday I had to cope with a bidding box where not only had the cards been scrambled, they had been returned to the box upside down.

That sounds more likely to be because the box fell.

BTW, someone pointed out something to me a few days ago: the back of the 1C card contains instructions on how to deal with this (at least in the sets ACBL uses at NABCs). How would we ever know what to do without it saying "Put this card in first, then 1♦, 1♥, and so on"?

[weejonnie]

I still wish the orange TD card was still around - it seems to have vanished.

[pescetom]

 weejonnie, on 2018-March-17, 10:03, said:

I still wish the orange TD card was still around - it seems to have vanished.

I never understood how it was intended to be used. Is it just something to wave instead of bellowing "Director", or should it remain on the table to indicate who made the call, or perhaps to indicate that one has reserved rights until the end of play?

[pran]

 pescetom, on 2018-March-17, 10:46, said:

I never understood how it was intended to be used. Is it just something to wave instead of bellowing "Director", or should it remain on the table to indicate who made the call, or perhaps to indicate that one has reserved rights until the end of play?

It is/was intended to stop all activity at the table because the player exposing that card was about to call the Director.

[blackshoe]

They disappeared around here years ago. I've always figured the club directors removed them from the bidding boxes.